Greater Anglia Rolling Stock Updates

[LAX54]

To convert that into 90 minutes end to end, surely they'll need stock that accelerates to 100 better than a cl 360, some very tight signalling and plenty of following wind. I can't see it happening with the 90 loco hauled sets.

I am assuming when it starts in May it will be one of the new units, the standard hauled set follows 3 mins behind from Norwich (so that will be late by Diss ! ) in order for the 9Pxx to maintain it's timing the 1Yxx gets recessed at Colchester, and the 1Nxx at Shenfield, however it does catch up with a Southend on the approach to Liverpool Street, arriving 2 mins behind it, 1 into P9 the other into 10.

 

[LAX54]

I may have to sample a run on a wet day to see if that has improved matters! Last wet run from Stratford to Norwich back in Sept 2016 lost time accelerating from every stop and braking to a stop due to the wet rails. We ended up 8 mins late at NRW. The 360s and 321's don't seem to suffer so badly. Though the Non Renatus 321s struggle to reach 100mph!!

We get almost half hourly calls from the TDA clerk when we have wet days, even just damp days asking why an Inter City set has lost 2 mins here, 3 mins there, we can only assume 'slipping'

 

[dk1]

I may have to sample a run on a wet day to see if that has improved matters! Last wet run from Stratford to Norwich back in Sept 2016 lost time accelerating from every stop and braking to a stop due to the wet rails. We ended up 8 mins late at NRW. The 360s and 321's don't seem to suffer so badly. Though the Non Renatus 321s struggle to reach 100mph!!

I obviously wasn't your pilot

 

[dk1]

I am assuming when it starts in May it will be one of the new units, the standard hauled set follows 3 mins behind from Norwich (so that will be late by Diss ! ) in order for the 9Pxx to maintain it's timing the 1Yxx gets recessed at Colchester, and the 1Nxx at Shenfield, however it does catch up with a Southend on the approach to Liverpool Street, arriving 2 mins behind it, 1 into P9 the other into 10.

Let's make the Southend non-stop through Stratford to give it some extra recovery (takes cover).

 

[apinnard]

I am assuming when it starts in May it will be one of the new units, the standard hauled set follows 3 mins behind from Norwich (so that will be late by Diss ! ) in order for the 9Pxx to maintain it's timing the 1Yxx gets recessed at Colchester, and the 1Nxx at Shenfield, however it does catch up with a Southend on the approach to Liverpool Street, arriving 2 mins behind it, 1 into P9 the other into 10.

Wow that is quite a challenge for the infrastructure. Looking at the spec of the 755s that will be on this run initially, they should urinate all over the timings end to end. Its just the signalling and timetable isn't ideal. Fingers crossed.

 

[Railperf]

Wow that is quite a challenge for the infrastructure. Looking at the spec of the 755s that will be on this run initially, they should urinate all over the timings end to end. Its just the signalling and timetable isn't ideal. Fingers crossed.

We don't know how well the 755s perform yet. But if they are comparable to euro spec FLIRTs then 0 to 100mph in less than 2 mins could be possible. You are only going to gain time on the acceleration to 100mph from station stops - Norwich, Ipswich and Liverpool Street, plus recovering back to max linespeed of 100mph from 60 and 70mph restrictions at Chelmsford and Manningtree.

 

[Dave1987]

I am assuming when it starts in May it will be one of the new units, the standard hauled set follows 3 mins behind from Norwich (so that will be late by Diss ! ) in order for the 9Pxx to maintain it's timing the 1Yxx gets recessed at Colchester, and the 1Nxx at Shenfield, however it does catch up with a Southend on the approach to Liverpool Street, arriving 2 mins behind it, 1 into P9 the other into 10.

The 1Yxx gets looped for 9 mins at Colchester that’s even worse than the Harwich getting looped at Witham for 7 mins.

 

[vinnym70]

As someone who travels Braintree to Stratford daily, my concerns on any timetable changes (especially the aspirations to accommodate the whole Norwich in 90 piece) are that other flows will suffer as noted in this thread.

Notably, the evening return from Stratford is daily well oversubscribed but a large loading the passengers on that train are only going to Shenfield. I'm pretty sure any significant timetable changes in lieu of the new fleet and odd aspirations such as Norwich in 90 will make other flows notably worse. As Braintree only has an hourly service, I'm hoping some lateral thinking will remove Shenfield stops during the peak as is the case with some peak Southminster services already. Just my selfish two penn'th though.

 

[Shunter_69]

A pretty pointless test really, given it was cut short for obvious reasons. The set lost a little bit of time between Witham and Kelvedon on the return too, probably because it had to go bang-line until Church Street crossing which doesn't really mimic the everyday scenario. I think its 70 max wrong line on that stretch.

It definitely went back Bi-directional to Kelvedon as I could see it in the distance as I was arriving at Witham on greens.

 

[86246]

I also saw this speeding through Stowmarket, a Norwich in 34 from Ipswich.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/F60306/2019/01/27/advanced

Unsurprisingly I believe that was about the time they managed when the timetables were changed in the late nineties when they introduced the additional off peak services calling only at Colchester and Ipswich on the London-Norwich runs.

 

[Railperf]

I also saw this speeding through Stowmarket, a Norwich in 34 from Ipswich.

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/F60306/2019/01/27/advanced

Unsurprisingly I believe that was about the time they managed when the timetables were changed in the late nineties when they introduced the additional off peak services calling only at Colchester and Ipswich on the London-Norwich runs.

Fastest Norwich to Ipswich and Ipswich to Norwich timings in the Railway Performance Society database are less than 31 mins for Class 86 hauled stock in the 1990's. Fastest Class 90 runs are under 34 mins, while even Class 170's, and 322's have achieved start to stop timings of less than 34 min.

 

[apinnard]

It definitely went back Bi-directional to Kelvedon as I could see it in the distance as I was arriving at Witham on greens.

I saw you at Witham in that case. Well, your unit.

The cl90 with lhcs was due to go through Kelvedon on platform 1, bang line all the way to Mark's Tey but instead was crossed over at church street onto the down line.

 

[Railperf]

As someone who travels Braintree to Stratford daily, my concerns on any timetable changes (especially the aspirations to accommodate the whole Norwich in 90 piece) are that other flows will suffer as noted in this thread.

Notably, the evening return from Stratford is daily well oversubscribed but a large loading the passengers on that train are only going to Shenfield. I'm pretty sure any significant timetable changes in lieu of the new fleet and odd aspirations such as Norwich in 90 will make other flows notably worse. As Braintree only has an hourly service, I'm hoping some lateral thinking will remove Shenfield stops during the peak as is the case with some peak Southminster services already. Just my selfish two penn'th though.

I'm sure the current timetable is designed around all the stopping services that use the route to Southend, Clacton, Braintree, Southend, Ipswich and Colchester Town. Then there are a couple of freight paths to slot in too. I guess the very mixed performance characteristics means they have to set timings to Class 321's - which seem to be the slowest accelerating trains on the route on a good day.
Though the 90's have traditionally suffered in the wet! Timings are very slack and can be tightened once you introduce a common fleet of trains with a uniform and much better performance characteristics than the current fleet.

The xx.02 Ipswich - normally diagrammed to 360's has so much slack that you can be 6 minutes late at Chelmsford, but recover all of that and even arrive early by Colchester. Otherwise if the service is running to time - you find drivers running on low power notches - not hitting much more than 80mph and extensive coasting - with gentle braking!

 

[306024]

The xx.02 Ipswich - normally diagrammed to 360's has so much slack that you can be 6 minutes late at Chelmsford, but recover all of that and even arrive early by Colchester. Otherwise if the service is running to time - you find drivers running on low power notches - not hitting much more than 80mph and extensive coasting - with gentle braking!

Really? I’d check your stopwatch. You can make up some time, but not 6 or 7 minutes as implied, certainly not with today’s driving principles and approach speeds to stations. The days of breaking at the last moment and hitting the platform at 50 mph or more are long gone.

 

[Railperf]

Really? I’d check your stopwatch. You can make up some time, but not 6 or 7 minutes as implied, certainly not with today’s driving principles and approach speeds to stations. The days of breaking at the last moment and hitting the platform at 50 mph or more are long gone.

This is nothing to do with driving principles. this is about how the timetable has lots of padding in it!
The current schedule from Chelmsford to Colchester excluding dwell time is 26.5 minutes - i have used 1Y12 10.02 LST - IPS for reference. Then add up the sum of all the fastest recorded times from the RPS archive between each of the stations - all aboard 360's on normal service trains being driven to current standards:
Chelmsford to hatfield Peverel - 5:02,
Hatfield Peverel to Witham - 3:07,
Witham to Kelvedon - 3:30,
Kelvedon to Marks Tey - 4:05,
Marks Tey to Colchester - 4:21
What is the sum of those timings? .....20:05 or almost 6.5 mins quicker than the schedule!!!!!!

 

[samuelmorris]

As someone who travels Braintree to Stratford daily, my concerns on any timetable changes (especially the aspirations to accommodate the whole Norwich in 90 piece) are that other flows will suffer as noted in this thread.

Notably, the evening return from Stratford is daily well oversubscribed but a large loading the passengers on that train are only going to Shenfield. I'm pretty sure any significant timetable changes in lieu of the new fleet and odd aspirations such as Norwich in 90 will make other flows notably worse. As Braintree only has an hourly service, I'm hoping some lateral thinking will remove Shenfield stops during the peak as is the case with some peak Southminster services already. Just my selfish two penn'th though.

I routinely used the 18:00 LST-BTR service to get to Shenfield, it was my main commute home for almost a full year and intermittently so for 3-4 years before that. It wouldn't inconvenience me terribly if the Shenfield call were removed, but it would be a bit wasteful, the service really wasn't that busy after Shenfield. Bear in mind the current peak timetable removes Shenfield from all the other peak services that run via Chelmsford bar a stray Harwich service. Something has to connect Shenfield to stations further northeast at that time of day (what about passengers who came from Goodmayes or further east on TfL) and it's also not really appropriate to reduce the service frequency to below that off-peak - as it stands you get 7-8tph fast in the peak, versus 7tph off-peak.

There are a large number of people (myself included) that use fast services to Shenfield to then backtrack to Brentwood, not just to save time, but to balance load. Other than in times of direction, 6tph 12-car services to Southend are by no means full, whereas TfL services very much are between Stratford and Ilford at least.

 

[jopsuk]

Clearly the answer is extra tracks. Put Crossrail in a tunnel all the way to Shenfield, with a rebuild of Stratford to put CR and Central line in a bottom level. Then, from Shenfield all the way to Haughley Junction, two addtional tracks, built for 140mph running, but on the same alignment. Grade separate every junction and close every level crossing all the way to Norwich. Extend every platform on the directly served branches to take 240m trains, with the 720 order changed to have the same number of units, but all 10 car.

Get this all done by May this year, should be easy. All problems sorted. Simple.

I am not serious

 

[306024]

This is nothing to do with driving principles. this is about how the timetable has lots of padding in it!
The current schedule from Chelmsford to Colchester excluding dwell time is 26.5 minutes - i have used 1Y12 10.02 LST - IPS for reference. Then add up the sum of all the fastest recorded times from the RPS archive between each of the stations - all aboard 360's on normal service trains being driven to current standards:
Chelmsford to hatfield Peverel - 5:02,
Hatfield Peverel to Witham - 3:07,
Witham to Kelvedon - 3:30,
Kelvedon to Marks Tey - 4:05,
Marks Tey to Colchester - 4:21
What is the sum of those timings? .....20:05 or almost 6.5 mins quicker than the schedule!!!!!!

Thought that comment would entice more detail. Thank you. Yes no doubt these are the fastest recorded runs, but would you seriously plan a whole timetable on that basis? With ATO perhaps, but the variation in driving styles of humans is something else. We may be talking at cross purposes anyway as I was referring to the average performance, not the best possible with a south westerly wind.

Between Chelmsford and Colchester there is the mandatory [2] minutes recovery time for TSRs. The timings between Hatfield Peverel and Witham reflect the old approach controlled signalling for stopping trains on the down main at Witham which thankfully has now been rectified. All 360s are on 321 timings on the main line to keep a pattern timetable and allow 321 substitution without any performance issues. The 30 second dwell times at Hatfield Peverel, Kelvedon and Marks Tey are actually planned as 40 seconds, an agreement that came in with DOO operation. As planning software can’t cope with that, the extra 10 seconds is added to the running times instead, then rounded to the nearest half minute according to NR rules for rounding times. Finally the overhead power supply is more variable than you may think. It is much better now on this section following Hill House feeder being introduced, but it hasn’t always been so.

None of which means I disagree, the new class 720s should be possible of improvements in running times, but to imply that 6 minutes could easily be taken out of the current schedules perhaps paints a slightly false picture.

 

[Railperf]

Wow that is quite a challenge for the infrastructure. Looking at the spec of the 755s that will be on this run initially, they should urinate all over the timings end to end. Its just the signalling and timetable isn't ideal. Fingers crossed.

If Stadler managed to get a class 755 in passenger service by May that will be a record for new rolling stock acceptance!!!

 

[Bikeman78]

I obviously wasn't your pilot

The first time I had a pair of bins to Norwich it was a battered pair of units in Silverlink livery; they went like a rocket. They nearly took off as they clattered over the points at Gidea Park!

 

[Wivenswold]

From Twitter, finally a complete Class 720 unit. It looks nice in the open.




https://twitter.com/ayhan_dikmen/status/1091663159792930816

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

From Twitter, finally a complete Class 720 unit. It looks nice in the open.

View attachment 58861


https://twitter.com/ayhan_dikmen/status/1091663159792930816

Take away yellow front and it would look even nicer in the open!

 

[chubs]

That does look really smart and will look good amongst the FLIRTs.

Really shows up how ancient most of the current GA stock is.

 

[bramling]

That does look really smart and will look good amongst the FLIRTs.

Really shows up how ancient most of the current GA stock is.

Doesn’t look bad. But there’s of course a snag - I’d rather take an 2x321 over 1x720.

 

[rdlover777]

Class 745 104 arrived today

not my picture

 

[LAX54]

Class 745 104 arrived today

not my picture

For Stanstead Express units

 

[43096]

For Stanstead Express units

It’s Stansted!

 

[LAX54]

It’s Stansted!

sorry it was the darn predictive / autocorrect...missed it

 

[Railperf]

Thought that comment would entice more detail. Thank you. Yes no doubt these are the fastest recorded runs, but would you seriously plan a whole timetable on that basis? With ATO perhaps, but the variation in driving styles of humans is something else. We may be talking at cross purposes anyway as I was referring to the average performance, not the best possible with a south westerly wind.

Between Chelmsford and Colchester there is the mandatory [2] minutes recovery time for TSRs. The timings between Hatfield Peverel and Witham reflect the old approach controlled signalling for stopping trains on the down main at Witham which thankfully has now been rectified. All 360s are on 321 timings on the main line to keep a pattern timetable and allow 321 substitution without any performance issues. The 30 second dwell times at Hatfield Peverel, Kelvedon and Marks Tey are actually planned as 40 seconds, an agreement that came in with DOO operation. As planning software can’t cope with that, the extra 10 seconds is added to the running times instead, then rounded to the nearest half minute according to NR rules for rounding times. Finally the overhead power supply is more variable than you may think. It is much better now on this section following Hill House feeder being introduced, but it hasn’t always been so.

None of which means I disagree, the new class 720s should be possible of improvements in running times, but to imply that 6 minutes could easily be taken out of the current schedules perhaps paints a slightly false picture.

I never suggested that you would recast the timetable and remove 6 minutes from it. What I said was - the current timetable had so much slack that it was possible to recover as much as 6 minutes between Chelmsford and Colchester aboard a Class 360 - but definitely not a 321.
Bearing in mind that the Class 720's are likely to accelerate as strongly as the 345's, - which themselves leave a 360 standing - then you could easily cut 3 to 4 minutes off the current Chelmsford to Colchester stopping schedule, without affecting reliability.
On a side note - isn't it about time that timetable planners started working to a minimum 1/4 minute or even to the second?

 

[samuelmorris]

I thought they did in practice with calculations but never formally wrote timetables more specific than half-minutes for operational convenience.